Monday, April 30, 2007

Democrat operatives are busy biting off more than they can possibly chew in Nashville this week, as they attempt to gather dirt on future Presidential candidate Fred Thompson. The operatives, who are awaiting identification by next of kin, have been searching through county records, primarily property records, in a desperate bid to defeat the future President. Their quarry, however, is not to be taken lightly. Fred Thompson once caused an opponent’s head to actually explode during a debate, just by glaring at him. Although it is a myth that Thompson invented the Thompson Sub-Machinegun, also known as the Tommy Gun, it is a documented fact that Thompson can wield a Tommy Gun in each hand and maintain a constant 1”MOA level of accuracy with each weapon, even while firing full auto.

Friday, April 27, 2007

In the off chance that anyone from the mainstream media happens to come to this site for some unknown reason, I thought it would be best to give them a heads up of sorts: It is now the end of April, which means that, as we here in the northern hemisphere approach summer, it will begin to get warmer outside. In fact, in a couple of months, it may even get downright hot. I just wanted to warn you all ahead of time so that you weren’t blindsided by it again, and thrown into a panic that the world is going to end or something. It does this every year about this time. It’s a cyclical pattern, almost seasonal, one might say. So just relax, take another Zoloft, and go back to making up stories about the President.

For anyone who wondered what I could have been thinking when I stated in my post about my new planet why it’s impossible to maintain a free, democratic, republic as envisioned by our founder fathers with liberals around, I would direct you to this post over at Ace of Spades. It’s an analysis of an article by a lefty former US diplomat on how he would deal with “The Gun Owner Menace.” Apparently, some liberals will accept anything, even a fascist police-state, in order to get what they want politically.

UPDATE: Iowahawk is all over this, too, and he's dead on target, as usual.

First: no Liberals. We’re going to have a free democratic-republic on my new planet, just like the founding fathers of this country envisioned, and, let’s face it, you just can’t have that with Liberals around.

Second, no Muslims. I know this sounds harsh, but we have to face facts here. There are a tremendous number of Muslims who would like nothing better than to kill themselves while taking a bunch of innocent bystanders with them. These kinds of things tend to lower the property value, and my new planet is ALL about property value. I know, I can hear you saying “That’s discriminatory! Most Muslims are moderate and don’t support terrorism in any way.” And you’d be right. But it’s just too damn hard to tell them apart from the crazies, so until they can start doing a better job of policing their own, they can either go infidel or stay home.

Third, no innocent bystanders allowed. I’m sick of having to hear sad stories on the news about how a bunch of people got shot because they couldn’t take the responsibility to protect themselves. On my new world, EVERYONE must own, and carry, a firearm. In fact, everyone who wishes to come will be tested to determine not only if they’re able to handle a firearm, but if they’re willing to USE one, should the need arise.

Fourth, no peaceniks. We are not a warlike people. We do not make war lightly, and when we do, we don’t want to be pestered about it by people who haven’t even smelled soap since they were kicked out of their parents house as teenagers. We are not warmongers. We will only resort to war when the opportunity presents itself. Or if we’re bored.

Fifth, and finally, no environmentalists. The whole principle behind the environmental movement is that we only have one planet, and we have to take care of it. Well, that’s not true anymore, is it? If there’s a habitable planet a mere twenty light years from Earth, they must be pretty common. So, instead of channeling valuable energies into preserving the planet, those energies will instead be channeled into building a huge fleet of starships that we can use to move on to the next habitable planet once we’ve sucked this one dry. Well, that, and war.

So, now that I’ve created this paradise off Earth, the question is, what to name it? Planet X? Alderaan? New Caprica? Bob? I’ll have to think about that one.

UPDATE:

The term Liberal in point one above will now be amended slightly to include Neo-Nazis, Holocaust Deniers, 9/11 Truthers, and Furries. I’m sure there will be people who ask “Are you equating such undesirables with Liberals?” As a matter of fact, yes I am. Deal with it.

So it appears that each of the Democrat candidates for President took private jets to the debate. No commercial flights, no “jet-pooling” to help conserve the Earth’s “precious and valuable resources.” And, of course, more commentary about this hypocrisy on Drudge and the blogs (like this). But here’s the sad truth: When Democrats talk about how we need to cut back on everything to save the environment, then turn around and live extravagantly themselves, it’s not really hypocrisy. Really, it’s not. They said WE have to cut back, to conserve. They never said anything about THEM having to cut back. The rules are meant for us, the little people. The ones who drag themselves out of bed every morning to go to job we can’t stand. The ones who make the country work. The ones who get shot while trying to get to class, because someone on high decided that everyone on campus should be defenseless. The ones who have to make the life and death decision of whether or not to crash their plane into the ground, because someone from on high thought it would be insensitive to give extra scrutiny to high risk passengers at the security terminal. You know, us serfs. Those rules don’t apply to them because they’re so much more important than us. They’re exempt. I don’t understand why I have to keep saying this, but this has never been about the environment, or about liberalism, either. This is about elitism. The Democrat party is the party of elitismThey used to say that religion is the opiate of the masses, and that Communism is the opiate of the intellectuals. Well, liberalism is the opiate of the self-important.

The more I read about and from Fred Thompson, the more I like him. I know it’s common nowadays for Presidential candidates, particularly Republican ones, to position themselves as “The Next Ronald Reagan”, but I’m beginning to believe that Thompson is the only one out there on the Republican side (or the Democrat side, for that matter) who even comes close. There’s only two reasons why Castro Burn In Hell hasn’t come out and officially endorsed Fred for the Republican nomination: 1) he hasn’t yet announced that he’s running (though I suspect he will), and 2) nobody really gives a rat’s ass who we endorse or why. That being said, he has been posting articles left and right (but mostly right) at National Review Online. Here’s the link to his most recent posting, from today, as a matter of fact.

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Howard Dean stated today that the best way to get the Presidential candidates to talk would be to bar the press from the debate. "If you want to hear the truth from them, you have to exclude the press," Dean said.The press, for all its many, many flaws, is how We The People hear the news. Excluding the press from a Presidential debate is tantamount to saying exclude the public from the debate. And here you have the truth about how the Dems think of We The People: “We’ll say what we really think and believe, but only if the people can’t hear it.” What better evidence could there be of their lack of confidence in their electability: They have to hide their core beliefs to get elected, because if the American people knew what the Dems really believed, they’d be run out of town on a rail.

Sunday, April 22, 2007

The History Channel is running a special tonight called “Sherman’s March” about the great general’s “March to the sea” in the winter of 1864-65. It’s playing three times tonight, and it’s filled with some great quotes from the general on the subject of war. I have often thought that our leaders should listen to the words of this man when engaging in warfare. This show only confirms my beliefs.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

It’s raining here today. My mother asks me “Isn’t it weird that it’s raining now?” “What,” I say, “you mean in April? Haven’t you ever heard April showers bring May flowers?” “Oh, yeah,” she says.I think a lot of people are like this; they have this basic picture in their minds about what the weather should be like: cold in the winter, then about March it starts warming up until it gets hot in the summer, then it starts cooling down about September until it gets cold again in the winter. The thing is, that’s mostly true, too. However, there are always exceptions, and some of those exceptions happen with great regularity.I used to work at a drive-in movie theater, which is a business that’s heavily impacted by the weather. When it’s cold, or raining, or foggy, business is slow. When it’s warm, business picks up. I’m not saying that makes me a weather expert, or anything, but when your job conditions depend on the weather, you tend to pay more attention to its patterns than someone whose job doesn’t.Now, in this area, just about every year in June we get a thunder storm. It comes out of nowhere, lasts for a couple of days, then disappears. I worked at the drive-in every summer for ten years, and this thunderstorm happened all but one of those years. So, every year this storm would come through, almost like clockwork, and every year, people would say, “That’s weird, I’ve never seen it storm in June before.” And I would say, “Yes you have. It did this last year, and the year before that, and the year before that, too. You just don’t remember it, ‘cause your memory sucks ‘cause you smoke too much pot. You’re probably high right now, aren’t you?” And, because this IS Northern California, they’d almost invariably say, “Oh yeah, that’s right, I am.” Then they’d go off looking for something to munch on, and I’d go back to reading the help wanted pages.So, the point I’m making here is that people in general don’t have very good memories when it comes to weather. The reason I bring this point up is because I’m beginning to suspect that that is the reason this whole Global Warming™ nonsense has taken off like it has. When some environmentalist functionary comes on the news to say that “This is the hottest summer on record!” most people will go “Yeah it is pretty hot. I don’t remember it ever being this hot,” when in point of fact most people can’t even remember what the weather was like three days ago, myself included.But I do remember that there’s a thunderstorm around here every June. So when it happens, and people start crying “It’s Global Warming™! We broke the sky! We’re all going to die!!”, I’ll be ready for ‘em.

The disease known as cancer is currently in the fight of its life, as it attempts to escape it’s most deadly foe: Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson. “It was a case of mistaken identity,” stated the cancer in an interview. “I thought I was just infecting some old guy. I had no idea what I was getting in to.” Cancer has recently checked itself into John Hopkins, in an effort to battle its condition, but clearly, it has its work cut out for it. Fred Thompson is one of the fiercest creatures in the animal kingdom, and has no known predators. Symptoms of Fred Thompson include listlessness, headache, and moments of extreme terror, followed by the onset Rapid and Painful Death Syndrome (RPDS). “Every day is a struggle, but I’m hoping I can make it through this,” cancer stated.Senator Thompson was out of the country single handedly destroying an al-Qaeda training camp with his bare hands, and was unavailable for comment.

Thursday, April 5, 2007

Wednesday, April 4, 2007

Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, while on a diplomatic visit to Syria, was photographed wearing a Hijab, the traditional head-scarf of Muslim women. The fact that she wore the traditional dress of a culture that she was visiting is not an issue, or at least it should not be. She did this previously in Israel, and no one had a problem with it. However, Israel is not Syria. Wearing a head covering in a holy site in Israel (which is the only place where she did so) is considered a sign of respect, and the failure of a woman to so would result in, at most, an occasional look of disapproval. In many Muslim countries, however, the Hijab is compulsory for women in public, period. Failure to wear one can get a woman arrested, raped, stoned to death, or even beheaded. Just a slight difference between the two. Furthermore, Israel is an ally of the United States, and her trip there had the approval of the US government. Syria, on the other hand, is an ally of a hostile country, Iran, and is also a potentially hostile country itself. It is responsible for the murder of Lebanese officials, of attempting to subvert the duly elected government of Lebanon, and of funding and supporting the actions of at least two terrorist organizations, Hamas, and Hezbollah. Pelosi is visiting in a manner designed to influence US foreign policy, even though she has no constitutional power or authority to do so.The timing of this visit is also questionable. Iran, as you know, has recently taken 15 British sailors hostage. By visiting Iran’s ally Syria while the British sailors are in captivity, it has allowed the Iranians to use this as a political opportunity. They could (and have, I note) release the hostages in such a way as to make it look as if the release was due to Pelosi’s efforts. The Iranians will look magnanimous for releasing them, Bush and Blair, the leaders of the Western war against Islamo-Fascist Terrorism, will look weak, and Pelosi, one of the leaders of the anti-war left, will look strong.But how does this make her a failure, you ask? Surely these victories will add to her power. Shouldn’t they be counted as successes? No.One of Pelosi’s core beliefs, in fact, one of the core beliefs of the Democrat Party (or so they say) is the fight for equality, especially between men and women. Muslim countries are notorious for their failure to promote equality between the sexes. In many Middle Eastern countries, women are treated as little more than objects. If a woman is raped in one of these places, she is often considered at fault for tempting her attacker. This is one of the reasons for the traditional Muslim woman’s attire: to protect her from attack from those her partially exposed flesh might tempt; although all they are really protecting her from is their own complete lack of self control and inability to police their own male populations. The Hijab, and other traditional forms of female Muslim dress, are really little more than instruments for the subjugation of women in those countries.When Jehan al-Sadat, an outspoken critic of traditional Islam’s treatment of women (who, it should be noted, now lives in the west for her own safety, and who would be considered a raging feminist by Muslim standards) visited Saudi Arabia, she did so alone (an unescorted woman in public is a big Muslim no-no), and she wore modern clothing. This was a big deal, and it got her a lot of attention from Islamic religious leaders. Because of her bravery, she was envied and idolized by Saudi women. Although I have never personally visited the country, I have heard from people who have that both Saudi men and women will tell you to dress as western as possible, in the hope that the more people who do so, the more acceptable it will become. Nancy Pelosi had the opportunity to do something truly great for the people of the Middle East. She could have pointedly worn modern clothing, and eschewed the Hijab. She could have sent a signal to the women of the Muslim world by saying “I stand with you and your desire for equality. I support my sisters around the world in their efforts to control their own destiny.” Instead, she chose to show respect for a Muslim tradition of female suppression and inferiority, all for the sake of scoring a few cheap political points back home.

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

Forecasters are predicting a “very active” hurricane season this year, with as many as nine major storms, and at least one hitting the US mainland. They predicted something similar last year, and it didn’t work out too well for them. Their excuse, of course, was that an unexpected el Niño disrupted the weather patterns, preventing the hurricane season from being as bad as expected. My response to that was that if you can’t predict an occurrence that’s so ordinary that it occurs every few years, why should we believe you when you predict something completely out of the ordinary.In any case, in the interest of fairness, I will now post my hurricane predictions for this season, so that no one can complain that I’m nothing but a harping critic (although I am) who refuses to put his reputation on the line with a prediction of his own. So here goes:

My prediction for this hurricane season is that, regardless of whether this season is busier than average, less busy than average, or just plain average, the result will be blamed on Global Warming™. That’s right, I said it. So all you environ-mentalists telling me to beware, I’ll tell you where to be. Out of my sight, that’s where.